| Număr de pagini: < [1 2 3] > | Proposal: new good citizenship rule for askers Inițiatorul discuției: Kim Metzger
|
|---|
Kirill Semenov 
Ucraina
Local time: 20:39
Membru (2004)
din engleză în rusă
+ ...
| Totally agree with Kim | Sep 4, 2008 |
I think that Kim hits the nail here. In the past ProZ seeked for more publicity and tried to be more visible in the Web. Now ProZ is undoubtedly the best resource available to translators so may be it's the right time to make the requirements for the professional level of KudoZ questions much stricter. I don't think that nowadays ProZ' goal is to help pupils to do their homework or to assist in translating some silly tattoos. (The first step may be to not allow kudoZ questions from non-registere... See more I think that Kim hits the nail here. In the past ProZ seeked for more publicity and tried to be more visible in the Web. Now ProZ is undoubtedly the best resource available to translators so may be it's the right time to make the requirements for the professional level of KudoZ questions much stricter. I don't think that nowadays ProZ' goal is to help pupils to do their homework or to assist in translating some silly tattoos. (The first step may be to not allow kudoZ questions from non-registered people.)
Kim's proposals sound really good, and if ProZ is not looking for `more hits' as Henry stated, it may be a great improvement to the KudoZ system. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Leave it as is... | Sep 4, 2008 |
NR_Stedman wrote:
It may be imperfect but it has helped me a lot and I can't see obvious ways of improving it. Suspending people is not a good idea and contrary in my opinion to internet ethics. Personally I find certain "professionals" unjustifiably hard-edged and sometimes as irritating as eager, point-seeking beginners.
I completely agree: Kudoz should be left as is. By looking at entries and the behaviour of askers and answerers, everyone can easily decide whether it is useful for their work or not. I already made my decision.
| | | | | Couldn't agree more | Sep 4, 2008 |
Marie-Hélène Hayles wrote: NR_Stedman wrote:
Recently I think there has been a tendency for the best translators to no longer answer questions or help out novices That's why Kudoz shouldn't be left as it is - so many of the most experienced among us have got sick of it and bowed out. My own contribution is now near zero - I no longer have the will to wade through several dozen basic and/or wrongly categorised questions to find one that is worth answering and for which I can actually make a useful contribution. this no doubt corresponds to the increased worries about competition exacerbated by reading the ProZ.com columns I doubt very much that people have stopped answering Kudoz because they're worried about the competition! You're not serious, surely? For the most part, we're talking about two totally separate markets - I am certainly not worried that any of the bottom feeders taking advantage of lax regulation of the Kudoz system would be able to take any of my clients away from me! 
Marie-Hélène Hayles wrote:
Why KudoZ shouldn't be left as it is (2) 7:50am
Stéphanie Soudais wrote:
There are indeed too many restrictions, but they all apply to answerers, while askers are not restricted by anything.
Exactly. All the restrictions are on those who are trying to help - no wonder they're just giving up.
More power to Kim for having the energy to persevere in trying to get site staff to acknowledge the problem and do something about it.
In an nutshell! Couldn't agree more.
| | | | | KudoZ is no longer what it used to be | Sep 4, 2008 |
Marie-Hélène Hayles wrote: NR_Stedman wrote:
Recently I think there has been a tendency for the best translators to no longer answer questions or help out novices That's why Kudoz shouldn't be left as it is - so many of the most experienced among us have got sick of it and bowed out. My own contribution is now near zero - I no longer have the will to wade through several dozen basic and/or wrongly categorised questions to find one that is worth answering and for which I can actually make a useful contribution.
I can´t agree more. I just posted a tread saying how disappointed I am with KudoZ. Any measures to improve it and encourage its use again by those who helped so enthusiastically before will be welcome.
| | |
|
|
|
Textklick
Local time: 18:39
din germană în engleză
+ ...
In Memoriam | Answerers come home - all is forgiven | Sep 4, 2008 |
Marie-Hélène Hayles wrote: Stéphanie Soudais wrote:
There are indeed too many restrictions, but they all apply to answerers, while askers are not restricted by anything. Exactly. All the restrictions are on those who are trying to help - no wonder they're just giving up. More power to Kim for having the energy to persevere in trying to get site staff to acknowledge the problem and do something about it.
Since I've been on board, I've seen Kudoz change a lot.
In my group, it was originally quite 'matey and laid-back' with a fair bit of humorous chit-chat, open opinions being expressed in a friendly manner and excellent answers being provided. Cilian - agree?
That aspect has changed a lot and I am sad that quite a few peers don't really bother to contribute any more. They were good.
Is it because the quality has become diluted by having so many more members in total (clearly a statistical likelihood), or is it 'unbalanced policing' that discourages peers to participate, as has been suggested?
Quite honestly, I simply don't bother to react if someone is posting related questions by the dozen.
Yet the less decent answers we have will inevitably result in that many more questionable decisions being made by askers, which will inevitably detract from the quality of the database.
* I agree that there should be guidelines, but must they be regulations? How about a few click box options as sub items within 'Request clarification'. For example "Please check glossary"/Please provide more context"? The display - when activated - 'Joe Soak suggests: Please provide more context.'
* Would an announcement that the the rules and regulations had generally been 'loosened up' encourage more experienced members to return? Would that result in less dubious questions/answers being posted, when more peers realise that they are walking on thin ice/getting nowhere/wasting their own/other peers' time?
Pure hypothesis. Pie in the sky?
What do you think?
Chris
| | | |
Textklick wrote:
That aspect has changed a lot and I am sad that quite a few peers don't really bother to contribute any more. They were good.
Is it because the quality has become diluted by having so many more members in total (clearly a statistical likelihood), or is it 'unbalanced policing' that discourages peers to participate, as has been suggested?
What do you think?
I haven't got time for the long answer I was planning but essentially, the reasons behind my diminishing participation are the generally decreasing quality of the questions being asked (dictionary fodder, lack of context, mis-labelled questions and so on) combined with the site's refusal (for that is what it amounts to) to do anything about it - and indeed to encourage all comers, prohibit attempted enforcement of "rules" on context and dictionary use and s*d the quality of the questions, answers or glossary, not to mention the opinions of the answerers who helped make Kudoz what it once was.
I would be very happy if Henry or some member of staff cared to take me up on this, but I fail to see how their reactions to various threads like this one over the last couple of years can be interpreted in any other way.
[Edited at 2008-09-04 13:19]
| | | | | Standard reminders for standard sins | Sep 4, 2008 |
I am not suffering (yet) from this problem, maybe because of my language directions, maybe because I am extensively using the asker filter, but I agree that using the filter means merely sweeping the problems under the carpet, which is not exactly what I would want my cleaning lady to do..
While I don't like regulations or sanctions, I do like reminders, because I think that making someone aware of an issue will suffic... See more I am not suffering (yet) from this problem, maybe because of my language directions, maybe because I am extensively using the asker filter, but I agree that using the filter means merely sweeping the problems under the carpet, which is not exactly what I would want my cleaning lady to do..
While I don't like regulations or sanctions, I do like reminders, because I think that making someone aware of an issue will suffice more often than not to educate him/her.
Textklick's click boxes (say this 3 times quickly) look like a good idea.
Harry ▲ Collapse
| | | | Tatty
Local time: 19:39
din spaniolă în engleză
+ ...
| Questions not good enough for us now? | Sep 4, 2008 |
Are the questions asked not good enough for us? What a strange idea. If they were all that simple I would answer lots of them. Actually I'm always amazed how people have time to answer them. I only answer the odd one, the ones that I know the answer to. And I don't think that an explanation is necessary if the answer you provide comes from your own experience. I think that askers are grateful for any input, even the undocumented stuff.
I also like to agree with and even compliment c... See more Are the questions asked not good enough for us? What a strange idea. If they were all that simple I would answer lots of them. Actually I'm always amazed how people have time to answer them. I only answer the odd one, the ones that I know the answer to. And I don't think that an explanation is necessary if the answer you provide comes from your own experience. I think that askers are grateful for any input, even the undocumented stuff.
I also like to agree with and even compliment contributors who have posted what is IMO a good answer.
[Editado a las 2008-09-04 19:56] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Myriam Dupouy
Franţa
Local time: 19:39
din engleză în franceză
+ ...
Stéphanie Soudais wrote: Kim Metzger wrote:
1. refused to provide context despite repeated pleas from members and moderators to do so – reacts with contempt for people asking for context
2. refused to check KudoZ glossary before asking questions
3. refused to do basic research or check standard dictionaries before asking questions
4. refused to type special characters (accent marks, umlauts) for source term despite repeated requests to do so
5. refused to categorize questions properly
6. refused to allow the full process to take place
a. closes questions as soon as first answer comes in, sometimes adding a question such as why another term wouldn't work
b. closes questions without grading – answer found elsewhere without saying what it was So true ! It has been months since I told myself "I must open a thread about askers who do not behave professionally". For example, in my pair there are more and more askers who close their questions without grading, reason : other (I am thinking of one member in particular who closes 3/4 of them without grading - why does s/he not ask "not for points questions" then?), while several answers are obviously good or at least quite helpful. Askers simply use your answers without a mere "thank you for helping", and when you publicly tell them that they could at least say thank you or tell what they eventually chose, your comments might be removed by moderators, because the purpose is to "help the asker", not to judge. I agree, but I think it is unfair for the answerers, because answerers take their time to help while askers "are always right" and allowed to behave in a disrespectful manner (as Kim detailed). Ignore them is not a solution, there are always (new) members who do not know this fact and/or are always willing to answer/help them. I think askers should be more educated (e.g. obliged to read the recommendations before asking a question - have you checked dictionaries? have you checked Kudoz glossary?...). There is for me no reason why askers should be allowed to show so much disrespect to answerers/other Prozians (whether deliberately or not)... Stéphanie [Edited at 2008-09-04 06:02]
2.6 Askers must close questions. Close questions by selecting the answer deemed most helpful (and awarding it points, unless the question was posed as "not-for-points"). Askers who do not close their questions within an appropriate period of time are not permitted to ask further questions. (Note that when no answer is deemed helpful, it is possible to close a question without selecting a most helpful answer.)
We have excellent specimen in our language pair indeed...I'm glad to see I'm not the only one suffering from this lack of respect and gratitude though...
| | | | | Is Kudoz commoditising US? | Sep 5, 2008 |
Myriam Dupouy wrote:
We have excellent specimen in our language pair indeed...I'm glad to see I'm not the only one suffering from this lack of respect and gratitude though...
By not imposing any kind of regulation ─yes, there are rules, but there is so little enforcement!─ about how to prepare the questions and about a minimum courtesy in Kudoz, is Kudoz making us answerers look like some kind of automatic dictionary askers can use freely, at no cost, and with a very demanding attitude without offering a little respect in exchange?
Are we selling our self-esteem for Kudoz points? Is Kudoz commoditising us?
| | | | Nikki Graham
Regatul Unit
Local time: 18:39
din spaniolă în engleză
| Click boxes in question form | Sep 5, 2008 |
Textklick wrote:
How about a few click box options as sub items within 'Request clarification'. For example "Please check glossary"/Please provide more context"? The display - when activated - 'Joe Soak suggests: Please provide more context.'
On the subject of click boxes, how about a few in the question form itself?
Such as:
Have you checked existing glossary entries (which are displayed during the asking process)?
Have you provided sufficient context?
Have you researched in dictionaries/Internet (please detail in question)?
If it were impossible to actually post the question without clicking on yes or no, then askers would be forced to check the glossary, provide context, do their own research. Of course, the answer "no" to any of these click boxes would make it impossible to post the question. And if askers decided to click on yes (to get question posted) when it was obvious that they had lied (term already in glossary/easy dictionary question/no context supplied), then moderator could be notified to give them a warning (or whatever).
With regard to some of Kim's other points, I have always thought it would be best to make it impossible for questions to be closed within 24 hours (rather than just a recommendation) and it should also be impossible to close a question without grading stating "answer found elsewhere" and not say what it is.
| | | |
Nikki Graham wrote:
I have always thought it would be best to make it impossible for questions to be closed within 24 hours (rather than just a recommendation) and it should also be impossible to close a question without grading stating "answer found elsewhere" and not say what it is.
Totally agree.
I would also like to see the "reason : other" removed. I you close without grading, it is either because you found the answer elsewhere, either because the answers provided are inapproriate. I can't see any other reason...
Too many askers used the "other" option without explaining why.
| | |
|
|
|
Textklick
Local time: 18:39
din germană în engleză
+ ...
In Memoriam | Singing from the same song sheet | Sep 5, 2008 |
Nikki Graham wrote: Textklick wrote:
How about a few click box options as sub items within 'Request clarification'. For example "Please check glossary"/Please provide more context"? The display - when activated - 'Joe Soak suggests: Please provide more context.'
On the subject of click boxes, how about a few in the question form itself? Such as: Have you checked existing glossary entries (which are displayed during the asking process)? Have you provided sufficient context? Have you researched in dictionaries/Internet (please detail in question)? If it were impossible to actually post the question without clicking on yes or no, then askers would be forced to check the glossary, provide context, do their own research. Of course, the answer "no" to any of these click boxes would make it impossible to post the question. And if askers decided to click on yes (to get question posted) when it was obvious that they had lied (term already in glossary/easy dictionary question/no context supplied), then moderator could be notified to give them a warning (or whatever).
Good point Nikki and also an alternative, but I still see some loopholes particularly when the situation is desperate.
As an asker, there is an easy way around that, as you say. Simply lie!
So imagine that you are sat there as a helper and see one of those 'daft questions'.
Your choices are to either ignore it, or to click on e.g: "Joe Soak suggests: please check the glossary" (as probably others would).
The benefit: saves mods' time - they have enough to attend to.
A further benefit: those who felt that they were 'getting got at' for whatever reason would either soon get the message, or would still have the opportunity to approach a mod, should they feel that they are being unjustly 'named and shamed'.
Cheers
Chris
| | | | Gina W
Statele Unite
Local time: 13:39
Membru (2003)
din franceză în engleză
| I agree that KudoZ should be left as is | Sep 7, 2008 |
Tomás Cano Binder wrote: .... By looking at entries and the behaviour of askers and answerers, everyone can easily decide whether it is useful for their work or not. I already made my decision.
Well put - I couldn't agree more. If professionals are the ones using the site then in using the glossary they should be able to see which questions/corresponding glossary entries should be used in a translation, and which ones should not be used.
And as far as a "good citizenship rule", imposing these criteria on askers only is extremely one-sided, plus I disagree with this anyway.
I also disagree with making it mandatory to wait 24 hours/impossible to close a question before then. No, I do not regularly close questions I ask right away but I just disagree with making this an absolute (and it's been discussed many times on the forums already.) If there must be a mandatory waiting period at all then it should be more like 12 or 18 hours. I don't see whereas closing a question at say, 20 or 22 hours, for example, should be blocked. (I usually wait longer than 24 hours but that's beside the point anyway.)
I also absolutely believe that Henry is correct in that the quality of the questions/answers is NOT progressively diminishing. That claim has been made in the past which I imagine is what led to the site conducting the related experiment that they did.
It also should be acknowledged that the site staff absolutely does not "do nothing" about KudoZ askers, questions, etc. The site staff has spent time re-vamping the process, putting limits on asking questions, etc. The site has grown and there have been substantial changes implemented. These things take time and effort. And these things are NOT "nothing". These things also are NOT exclusively limitations/rules regarding answerers, they DO in fact affect askers.
| | | | | Kudoz should be governed by rules. | Sep 8, 2008 |
Hi,
I read all the above threads and saw no. of replies concerned opposing any idea of restriction or rule. I am working in English-Hindi and viceversa language pair for number of years. I've seen a trend in proz kudoz questions in my language pair i.e.
A particular person asks question and selects answers of selective no. of people making them toppers in the freelancers listing. Asker does it number of times, even after repeated pleas by good translators or people through peer comme... See more Hi,
I read all the above threads and saw no. of replies concerned opposing any idea of restriction or rule. I am working in English-Hindi and viceversa language pair for number of years. I've seen a trend in proz kudoz questions in my language pair i.e.
A particular person asks question and selects answers of selective no. of people making them toppers in the freelancers listing. Asker does it number of times, even after repeated pleas by good translators or people through peer comments. I was actively participating in kudoz answering system till few years back. After I started seeing silly questions (many a times, a big and good long sentence consisting of no. of words) asked by a particular asker, I stopped answering his questions. They were not at all researched or studied and the asker terms himself as student.
I would have liked to ask that student, that if he doesn't know how to translate a simple term, then what is he trying to do here? He should go to a class where translations theories and practices are taught, just as many of us have done. He should pay for those classes, become a translator and then come to this platform.
Moreover, I suspect, that this is just a plan been implemented to benefit a small group of people or translators, who answer his questions. They might have created a fake asker, are answering his/her questions and earning kudoz to remain at top in kudoz tally to grab more and more work and jobs. In this way, all other good translators are affected, which obviously is none of ours purpose! Isn't it?
I posted a thread asking for some action mentioning the username of that proz user, which was removed mentioning a rule that none of us can mention anyone's name or something in proz forums.
If a member is not restricted under any rules and regulations, isn't it something that no. of us are encouraged to be involved into false practices to earn kudoz, so that one can remain at the top each and everytime?
Let's discuss.....
PRAKAASH
FREELANCE TRANSLATOR OF HINDI, NEPALI, SANSKRIT AND ENGLISH TO FOUR OF THE SAME. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Număr de pagini: < [1 2 3] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Proposal: new good citizenship rule for askers | Anycount & Translation Office 3000 | Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.
More info » |
| | Trados Studio 2022 Freelance | The leading translation software used by over 270,000 translators.
Designed with your feedback in mind, Trados Studio 2022 delivers an unrivalled, powerful desktop
and cloud solution, empowering you to work in the most efficient and cost-effective way.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
